Poll - Lowest Wearing Engine on BITOG

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Nov 16, 2002
Messages
40,468
Location
NJ
My vote goes to the Honda 2.4L that is actually in my Accord. So far after several UOA's, bearing wear is non-existant after thousands of miles. Very impressive engine. Lets see what others think.

I found 11 UOA's of the Honda 2.4L. Here are the numbers.

Total Miles collectively - 96,000

Fe wear AVG - - 85ppm

Pb wear AVG - 8ppm

I really think this is the lowest wearing engine on the board. Let me clarify something, lowest meaning what we see via UOA's. Some obviously feel we don't get the whole story but for this purpose, I'm going by UOA's.

Oils used in collective sample:
Schaeffer's
Amsoil
ExxonSuperflo
M1
Pennzoil

2 best reports were Amsoil/Exxon then Schaeffer's/M1.
Best viscosity retention seemed to be Mobil 1.

[ June 12, 2005, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: buster ]
 
UOA's are only art of the wear story. I would have to say that most Japanese I-4 2.4l motors are great wearing engines but the Honda in particular is well refined, while the Toyota 2.4 truck engines are a little more torquey but thus shed more. The 4.7 Lexus/Toyota v-8 is also a great engine.
We cannot discount the higher end LS series engines from GM. When they want to they can build a fine motor.

It is hard for me to make an objective choice.
 
Say you had two 2.4l engines, one was built with 50% larger main and rod bearings, or had more main bearings supporting the crank load. A heavy duty engine if you will. You get UOA's done and see more bearing material, does that mean the heavyduty motor is wearing? or just has more bearing surface area to give up material? And the other engine with it's tiny toy bearings with small surface area is superior?

Same can be said with rings and bores. The toy motor may have real thin rings with nitrated surfaces that don't throw off much chrome. The bores may be fusion coated or nicasil'd and throw off low iron. The heavy duty motor may use more conventional parts (but bigger and thicker) and throw off more wear PPM's, but can throw them off for many many miles?

Don't claim to have the answer, but it's something to think about.
 
I think that is too broad a statement to make which engine has the lowest wear. A lot has to do with climate conditions and the driver itself.

Would agree them Honda engines are something else. Lexus as well and Toyo, BMW, and so on.

If you had a Ford that went 500,000 miles...would that make a difference.
 
My point was I don't think you can compare UOA and say one engine will last longer based on that alone. Case in point the old checker cabs that had the old flathead continental engine in them, they racked up miles in the millions. But I'd bet the UOA's on them would've looked terrible.
 
I have to agree with some of what wileyE states.. IF the question was "which engines give the best UOA's we are onabsolutely correct in these ratings. But calling it best overall wear is looking at it from only one indicator. The other would be tear down and wear measurements...

Seeing how the second indicator is neither practical or affordable the UOA's are the only indicator we have to measure our engines.

Now if we were comparing two identical engines the UOA's would indicate which individual engine is displaying better wear. But that is all. Through trending of differnt engines a baseline would be established for each model. With enough data this becomes usefull information. Despite the variables of climate, terrain and driving habits those with a large enough Data base can make sense of it all.

Naturally we like to see low wear numbers when we look at UOA's but we are equally wrong to judge a motor type or an oil brand by its trends as seen here. 10-20 ppm here are there could mean many things. but it isn't apples to apples.
 
Yeah it's definitely too broad. I just was fooling around out of curiousity to see what others thought.
smile.gif
 
It is absolutely fun to compare. As I stated earlier in another thread. Some motors seem to do well on any properly rated oil. I still believe these are some of the better built engines but there are also differnt engine buliding philosophies. Some are built on tight manufacturing tolerances and precision. Others are built heavily but with a larger acceptable range of clearances. (Heavy diesel engines for example)

For automotive and light truck our taste are moving towards refinement.. That means tighter clearances more precision in the build and a quieter smoother running engine. a Motor built on the opposite philosophy of "build it like a tank" can last just as long or longer [particularly in severe curcumstances.

Do you fish? I di, I like a certain amount of precision in my fishing reels but I cannot get the hier end bass reels because I fish in slalt water. This is a harsh environment. So I use more durable but less precise gear for this harsher use. I may be able to feel the antireverse kick in but if a grain of sand gets in the reel I can keep fishing. With the more precise freshwater reels a small grain of sand will put it out of action.
Big iron inline 6's from dodge and Jeep are good examples of engines designed to take abuse in tough conditions. While BMW and lexus smoothness could not handle the same environment. I love the Lexus motir in the Tundra for example, I would rather they drop a truck engine and not a car engine in it though.

Honda is what it is , designed around it's expected service.


Did I go long???
smile.gif
 
Going by company to company and all the engines they make:

Foreign makes:

1) Toyota
2) VW/Audi
3) Mercedes
4) Subaru
5) BMW
6) Honda/Acura
7) Mazda
8) Nissan
9) Volvo
10) SAAB

Domestic manfacturers:

1) Ford
2) GM, including Saturn
3) DC Jeeps and Chryslers

You have to take into consideration the ratio of engine displacement to sump size, as well as the valvetrain design. For example, does the engine use pushrods, with a fully lubricated timing chain and sprockts? A domestic pushrod V-6 or V-8 will never look as "pretty" on a UOA as a 1.6L, all aluminum, DOHC Toyota engine, due to these design features.

Tooslick
 
"I think that the Toyota engines and Subaru engines win the prize on here"

Yeah, it's just a generalization I was throwing around because over 96,000 miles worth of UOA's with the Honda 2.4L, bearing wear barely exists. In fact, no bearing wear that is visible to a UOA is even present. Amazing....

Tooslicks's list seems to be pretty accurate to me. The Honda V6's actually don't show all that well. This 2.4L in particular just stands out among the Honda line. Toyota and Subaru are definitely tops.
 
Ford V-8s use a new type of Al based, tri-metallic bearings w/ NO lead....

Spend some time @ www.SAE.org in the "Fuels and Lubricants" technical papers section and you can read all about this technology....

Tooslick
 
I know about the aluminum bearings in the modular V-8's. If you spent any time in the UOA section you would notice that the aluminum numbers of these engines are also extremely low. Much lower than a lot of lead numbers of other engines.
 
Little off-topic...

I've driven my last three new vehicle purchases to the junkyard 16-19 years after their birth. The reason being is because the vehicle became too dangerous to drive. Most engine models will outlive vehicle rust with regular upkeep when living in towns that use salt on roads during the winter.

Handwashes in the winter is key. Use the brush at Do-It-Yourself multi-quarter car washes. That brush will add years to your vehicle because Drive-thru car washes constantly miss the same spots that salt sets in to.... eventually causing rust.

You need proper car washing over longest engine models. Most care-fored engines will outlast rust.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom